CRESSim–MPM: A Material Point Method Library for Surgical Soft Body Simulation with Cutting and Suturing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A number of recent studies have focused on developing surgical simulation platforms to train machine learning (ML) agents or models with synthetic data for surgical assistance. While existing platforms excel at tasks such as rigid body manipulation and soft body deformation, they struggle to simulate more complex soft body behaviors like cutting and suturing. A key challenge lies in modeling soft body fracture and splitting using the finite-element method (FEM), which is the predominant approach in current platforms. Additionally, the two-way suture needle/thread contact inside a soft body is further complicated when using FEM. In this work, we use the material point method (MPM) for such challenging simulations and propose new rigid geometries and soft-rigid contact methods specifically designed for them. We introduce CRESSim-MPM, a GPU-accelerated MPM library that integrates multiple MPM solvers and incorporates surgical geometries for cutting and suturing, serving as a specialized physics engine for surgical applications. It is further integrated into Unity, requiring minimal modifications to existing projects for soft body simulation. We demonstrate the simulator’s capabilities in real-time simulation of cutting and suturing on soft tissue and provide an initial performance evaluation of different MPM solvers when simulating varying numbers of particles. The source code is available at https://github.com/yafei-ou/CRESSim-MPM.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.005 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".